Window displays at Barneys in New York City - featuring blood spattered mannequins who appeared to be fighting off attackers - were taken down after customers were horrified. (Inquiries from The Daily News didn't hurt either, I'm sure.)
Simon Doonan, creative director at the department store, said the windows were done while he was away. "We encourage our display people to be creative. We give them a lot of latitude, but this clearly crossed the line." Uh, yeah. I'd say so.
Related Posts: America's Next Top (Dead) Model
Wrangler features sexydead models
Dead women, furries and rehab: The pinnacle of fashion
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Barneys pulls murdered models window.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15109
Triggering imagery in the name of fashion is always in. Sigh.
Leaving alone the triggery aspect, I just don't get these kinds of campaigns from a marketing point of view. I mean, do they really sell clothes? Who walks up to a window or looks at a spread in a magazine and says, "I have to get that dress, it looks great on that dead chick!"?
Marketing rule #1. Don't offend people. #2. If you don't know that murdered women (or slavery, war, the holocaust) will offend people, find a new career.
Sometimes I want to kill emaciated faceless mannequins wearing million dollar dresses...
I don't like rape or war, but I find the perspective here interesting in a similar way I feel when I watch Dexter. The displays are uniquely artistic maybe? Just a thought.
Yeah, I kind of like it cuz I like bloody/scary imagery.
But yeah, they could have mutilated a few male mannequins too.
Yeah, I kind of like it cuz I like bloody/scary imagery.
But yeah, they could have mutilated a few male mannequins too.
It's.... a ... mannequin.
Wanna have funeral for it or something? Art/Fashion students do bizarre things with mannequins all the time.
There is a certain beauty to artistically staged murder. It might not have been wholly appropriate, but it gets attention, but it's unique compared to usual window displays (though Barney's windows are always fantastic).
I do agree that the theme of death and staged murder can be shown beautifully in an artistic sense. But everyone has to ask why is it always always always women who are the topic?
Although I would never have imagined a women's clothing store using murder as a display, the thought is more feasible to me than a man's store using it.
Do you imagine any sort of men's brand showing dead male models? Even if they decided to do it in some "macho" way? What would that even look like?
You're right. A good point and great idea for my next art project!
Because women are more likely to have violence done to them? That would be my answer.
Personally, I would see this display and think, "Good for someone to raise awareness." Of course, it doesn't help that the women being murdered are all in expensive clothing, but the idea that violence against women is everywhere can still be present.
Men are more likely to be victims (and perpetrators) of violence than women. But dead women are just soooooo sexy.
This is not much better. Torture.
http://www.smh.com.au/photogallery/2008/01/23/1201024960396.html
The Wrangler pictures are clearly of dead women. They have debris (leaves, dirt) all over them, as if they had washed up on shore. You don't swim with your pants halfway down your butt. I have absolutely no idea why Wrangler thinks this is a good ad campaign. Whatever.
The fashion industry is always so bad at being "edgy". Not only is the necrophilia thing alienating to the women they're targeting as buyers ("I wish I could be a sexy murder victim...what?"), it's an OLD idea.
Zombie pin-up community much? If you're going to use the old sex&violence schtick to sell clothes, at least make it tongue in cheek.
This could be artistic, but I do find it out of place, distasteful and strange in a mannequin display box. And I don't think bloody women is a particularly smart way to sell clothes, though it will certainly attract attention (maybe that's what they were going for). However, I don't think it's right to censor art simply because some people interpret it in a way that they find offensive.
I wouldn't care if these were part of an art exhibit. But I wouldn't want to walk by the store window with my young son. Aren't there plenty of violent images and violence against women depictions in our society as it is? I don't think it's censorship to pay attention to the surroundings of what you display.
If the point of the display was to shock or grab attention, it worked. If the point of was to sell clothes, I wonder how well it worked. I love clothes and fashion, but somehow seeing beautiful clothes on bloody mannequins does not make me want to buy them. Just the opposite.
There's an ad with a guy posing in dresses in a magazine I get. It annoys me so much that the guy is wearing the dresses that I won't even look at it and certainly would never buy them (if I could afford them, that is). I don't want to look like a guy. I don't want to look like a murder victim.
Maybe I'm too much of a simpleton.
The most disturbing this about this, for me, is the new level of objectification reached by using "dead" models - of any sex, gender, race, etc.
It is bad enough selling a product that's perhaps related, laterally related, or unrelated to improving or assessing a person's oh-so-important attractiveness. This allows us to project whatever qualities we want to on this person, to make assumption about the model's character, ideals, and worth.
But using a dead body allows us to objectify to the point of dismissing PERSONHOOD. Models in a fashion magazine can't talk or move around or tell us about themselves, but whatever qualities you foist upon them, you (probably) still regard them as a person. Looking at a DEAD body allows one the option to NOT identify with a person, but with a mere object, a lump of carbon that's degrading into something else. IT'S NOT HUMAN ANYMORE...it's just an object in human form. And making that association allows us to see humans as just another non-sentient, non-feeling, -hoping, -wishing, -whatevering thing, and not as people.
It's even more disturbing, as other commenters have noted, that this morbid marketing scheme only features female models. What does this mean? What does this say about how the fashion industry regards human beings of the female flavor?
It's absolutely disgusting on so many levels. I can't believe this is considered an "edgy," viable marketing scheme, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
This reminds me of when ANTM did the whole "dead model" photo shoot. I so don't get the fascination with death/torture/abuse. Frankly, knowing what I would look like dead (as a result of assault no less) in $200 jeans does not make me want to buy them.